-=> Quoting Keith Knapp to David Hartung <=-
 DH> KK> What you believe is none of my business, none of the ACLU's 
usiness,
 DH> KK> and none of anybody else's business either.  Period.  But when you
 DH> KK> try to make your religious beliefs into American policy, you are
 DH> KK> violating everyone else's American right to not have to believe your
 DH> KK> particular theology.
 
 DH> Explain to me how the display of a Nativity scene on the lawn of city
 DH> hall, as part of a larger display, makes Christianity public policy?
 DH> How is allowing a Christian group to use school facilities(as they
 DH> allow other groups), making Christianity a public policy? Both of these
 DH> refer to actions of the ACLU, which have had the effect of limiting
 DH> the expression of Christianity as compared to the rest of society.
 KK> Only in the context of government institutions.
 Simple fact, the ACLU has sought to deny Christian groups the same
 access that other groups enjoy, and this denial is in itself,
 unconstitutional.
 DH> RP>I thouroughly enjoyed the reaction of that town in New Jersey to ACLU
 DH> RP>court suits - they removed the Christmas displays and replaced them 
with
 DH> RP>signs quoting the New Jersey Constitution preamble, which speaks of 
God
 DH> RP>from beginning to end.  Another sign indicates the town will continue
 DH> RP>its fight to restore religious freedom and once again proudly display
 DH> RP>the emblems of the season on public grounds as has so long been the
 DH> RP>tradition of this nation.
 KK> If the town contained any Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Moslems, or Navajo,
 KK> what do you think would happen if _they_ tried that?
 
 My understanding is that they had displays from several religions, but
 that Christianity was singled out.
 DH> I know of no law passed in my lifetime which has established
 DH> Christianity as the state faith.
 KK> Why do the words 'de facto' spring to mind?
 
 Please explain.
 DH> I seem to recall having read somewhere(perhaps the two Roberts know of
 DH> this) that the way to bring about a socialist state, one must first
 DH> destroy the existing legal system,by bringing about a state of anarchy.
 KK> That's Communism you're talking about -- violent revolution,
 KK> dictatorship of the proletariat, etc.  When I finally got around to
 KK> reading about Marx, I couldn't believe he could be so incredibly naive
 KK> as to think that "when the state has withered away, the people will
 KK> enjoy a new freedom."  Even in the 30s, the Soviets demonstrated that
 KK> it was the people who withered away and the state that enjoyed a new
 KK> freedom. 
 In the context of history, it was Socialism which the Soviet Union was
 actively trying to export, and the destruction of the existing system
 was their first step.
 DH> The resulting disorder would be so great, that the people would be
 DH> willing to give up much or all of their liberty in order to restore
 DH> law and order.
 KK> I'm not sure how this applies to the ACLU's efforts to keep a clear
 KK> separation between church and state.
 he ACLU has historically tried to destroy the existing system, and
 their activities against Christianity is merely part of the fight.
 david.hartung@mcione.com
 Ilks of Metropolitan Walls/LENS
 Proud member of White House Enemies database
... RAM = Rarely Adequate Memory
___ Blue Wave/386 v2.21 [NR]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0
---------------